Sampling weighting strategies in causal mediation analysis

Abstract Background Causal mediation analysis plays a crucial role in examining causal effects and causal mechanisms. Yet, limited work has taken into consideration the use of sampling weights in causal mediation analysis. In this study, we compared different strategies of incorporating sampling weights into causal mediation analysis. Methods We conducted a simulation study to assess 4 different sampling weighting strategies-1) not using sampling weights, 2) incorporating sampling weights into mediation “cross-world” weights, 3) using sampling weights when estimating the outcome model, and 4) using sampling weights in both stages. We generated 8 simulated population scenarios comprising an exposure ( A ), an outcome ( Y ), a mediator ( M ), and six covariates ( C ), all of which were binary. The data were generated so that the true model of A given C and the true model of A given M and C were both logit models. We crossed these 8 population scenarios with 4 different sampling methods to obtain 32 total simulation conditions. For each simulation condition, we assessed the performance of 4 sampling weighting strategies when calculating sample-based estimates of the total, direct, and indirect effects. We also applied the four sampling weighting strategies to a case study using data from the National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH). Results Using sampling weights in both stages (mediation weight estimation and outcome models) had the lowest bias under most simulation conditions examined. Using sampling weights in only one stage led to greater bias for multiple simulation conditions. Discussion Using sampling weights in both stages is an effective approach to reduce bias in causal mediation analyses under a variety of conditions regarding the structure of the population data and sampling methods.